New Obama ad: Dude, I found my second-term agenda!

posted at 8:41 am on October 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

This would be hilarious if it weren’t so … well, hilarious, really, but in a very sad way. The Barack Obama campaign officially launched in April 2011. They have raised something close to a billion dollars, and they’ve certainly spent almost as much on field offices, GOTV efforts, and tons of campaign advertising. They even created their fantasy of a woman living under Barack Obama’s benevolent governance, “Julia,” that managed to creep out so many women that they have done their best to send Julia to the Island of Misfit Political Mascots.

The one thing they didn’t have is a reason for anyone to vote for Barack Obama — a second-term agenda. Mark Halperin became the loudest voice in the media to point this out after the second debate came and went without it, and even some Democrats began to wonder whether Obama himself knew what he wanted to do with a second term. Hours after the third debate passed without an agenda, guess what Team Obama discovered?

After weeks of being challenged by Democrats and Republicans to lay out his second-term agenda, President Obama’s campaign is releasing a 20-page booklet called “Blueprint for America’s Future” on Tuesday and airing a new television ad to support it.

The 60-second spot, called “Determination,” outlines several policy initiatives the president will tackle if he were to get reelected. Calm and poised, speaking over soft music and images of soldiers coming home, farmers in the fields and manufacturing workers in factories, Obama makes a pitch directly to the camera in the ad.

“There’s just no quit in America and you’re seeing that right now,” Obama says, before going on to lay out several first-term accomplishments. He continues, “We’re not there yet, but we’ve made real progress and the last thing we should do is turn back now.”

Obama then describes his plan: “Making education and training a national priority; building on our manufacturing boom; boosting American-made energy; reducing the deficits responsibly by cutting where we can, and asking the wealthy to pay a little more. And ending the war in Afghanistan, so we can do some nation-building here at home. That’s the right path.”

This is an act of desperation on Team Obama’s part. Until the debates, their entire strategy was to attack Mitt Romney as an unacceptable choice, as a vampire capitalist/weirdo who couldn’t possibly handle the presidency. The decision to hold off on a second-term agenda was deliberate, as deliberate as their intent to paint Romney as The Other and toxify him so that Democrats could win a base turnout election.

Now that the debates are over, the Obama campaign belatedly realizes just how misguided that strategy turned out to be. Now they want to rush an agenda out in order to make a positive claim for the office, because Romney turned out to be more presidential than Obama in the debates. People will rightly ask why Obama waited until 14 days out from the election to bother to make a positive case for a second term — and come to the proper conclusion that Obama’s arrogance led him to believe he’d never have to make that case to voters at all. He figured he was owed a second term.

Too little, far too late.

Addendum: Have we made ‘real progress’? Just a few charts to mull over while considering that claim. First, let’s look at jobs since the recession began in comparison to all other post-WWII recessions:

Next we have the civilian workforce participation percentage rate over the last 18 years:

Finally, here are deficits over the last 12 years, and for the next seven under Obama’s projected budgets:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

One problem with this is he doesn’t have any debates left to talk about it. I live in the swing state of Ohio and everyone here has tuned out the commercials. So if he really does have a message, it isnt’ going to get through.

The second chart is the most telling and the most devastating. MILLIONS of people have simply given up on working, and all Obama has done is give them EBT cards. They represent a massive amount of human capital that is not being utilized, and of human devastation that arises from being idle and unproductive and hopeless.

Obama’s economic performance is really an atrocity. It’s incredible that he has the sack to even ask for another term.

Here my second term agenda: I am going to increase the happiness quotient, I am going to make jobs, I am going to clean the air, I am going to make us energy independent, I am going to end all wars. So, look at mitt Romney’s plan and tell me mine isn’t better. And be sure to ask Romney for specifics! We can’t let him get away with empty promises and amorphous goals!

As you look at the graph above of deficts, keep in mind that the last budget produced by a Republican House, Republican Senate, and Republican President was passed in 2006 for FY 2007 (October 1, 2006 – September 30, 2007), and resulted in a defict of UNDER $161 BILLION.

Then, Democrats took majority control of Washington, D.C.

Senators Obama, Biden, and Clinton were part of that Democrat majority that passed the FY 2008 budget which NEARLY TRIPLED the deficit to $459 Billion.

And then, they tripled it AGAIN.

The first budget passed by a Democrat House, Democrat Senate, and Democrat President was passed in 2009 for FY 2009 (October 1, 2008 – September 30, 2009), and resulted in a defict of $1,413 Billon, i.e. over $1.4 TRILLION.

Do the math.

The Dem-Dem-Dem FY 2009 budget produced a deficit that was 8.8 times the size of the Rep-Rep-Rep FY 2007 budget deficit.

A nearly 9 times bigger defict in FY 2009, only two years after FY 2007.

And Obama carried Trillion-plus deficits into each of his years as President.

President Obama’s campaign is releasing a 20-page booklet called “Blueprint for America’s Future” on Tuesday and airing a new television ad to support it.

Let’s look at the last time Democrats released such a blueprint…

Here is what Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats promised in 2006 in order to win the 2006 elections and control of Congress:

Over the past decade, the Republican controlled Congress took our nation in the wrong direction. Too many Americans are paying a heavy price for those wrong choices: record costs for energy, health care and education; jobs shipped overseas; and budgets that heap record debt on our children. For millions, the middle-class dream has been replaced by a middle-class squeeze…

Democrats are proposing a New Direction for America…

With integrity, civility and fiscal discipline, our New Direction for America will use commonsense principles to address the aspirations and fulfill the hopes and dreams of all Americans. That is our promise to the American people….

Our federal budget should be a statement of our national values. One of those values is responsibility. Democrats are committed to ending years of irresponsible budget policies that have produced historic deficits. Instead of piling trillions of dollars of debt onto our children and grandchildren, we will restore “Pay As You Go” budget discipline.

Budget discipline has been abandoned by the Bush Administration and its Republican congressional majorities. Congress under Republican control has turned a projected $5.6 trillion 10-year surplus at the end of the Clinton years into a nearly $3 trillion deficit– including the four worst deficits in the history of America. The nation’s debt ceiling has been raised four times in just five years to more than $8.9 trillion. Nearly half of our nation’s record debt is owned by foreign countries including China and Japan. Without a return to fiscal discipline, the foreign countries that make our computers, our clothing and our toys will soon be making our foreign policy. Deficit spending is not just a fiscal problem – it’s a national security issue as well.

Our New Direction is committed to “Pay As You Go” budgeting – no more deficit spending.

And here is what Nancy Pelosi promised on January 4, 2007 when she became Speaker of the House:

After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: pay-as-you-go, no new deficit spending. Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.

On the day that Nancy Pelosi said that,the Total Public Debt Outstanding was $8,670,596,242,973.04 (less than $8.7 Trillion)

Now, (data as of 10/19/2012), the Total Public Debt Outstanding is more than $16,196,052,388,163.26 (almost $16.2 Trillion)

Democrats, including Obama, slammed President Bush and Republicans for the debt they added. But in the twelve years that Republicans held majority control of Washington, D.C. (FY 1996-2007), the national debt went up about $4 Trillion.

Washington, D.C. has been under majority Democrat control ever since 1/3/2007. And in the last five fiscal years, Democrat majorities have increased the national debt well over $7 Trillion.

I am no fan of deficit spending, but any fool can see that $4 Trillion in new debt accumulated by Republican majorities over the span of 12 years is much better than $7+ Trillion in new debt accumulated by Democrat majorities over the span of just 5 years!

Ok, let’s take this one at a time and see who’s smarter than a 5th grader…

Making education and training a national priority;

First, education and training are nice… after all they are the qualities that are considered in candidates once you are hiring for jobs! Someone might need to explain to Obama the order in which you put the cart and the horse. Second, where is education and training listed in the US Constitution? FAIL

building on our manufacturing boom;

We’re in a boom? Really? Wow. Maybe someone should show him the job reports on the number of manufacturing jobs that have left. So what does “building” on a downward trend mean? FAIL

boosting American-made energy;

ROFL! How? By opposing the environmentalists in your base by reversing the EPA mandates that have been strangling the coal power industry? Do you even know the count of coal plants that have closed just in Ohio? Do you realize that with decreased supply, we will have higher costs in electric bills? And you’re serious? FAIL

reducing the deficits responsibly by cutting where we can,

This, from the party that couldn’t even pass a simple budget? This, from the President that couldn’t get even a single member of his party to vote for his budget? This, from a President who presided over two years with complete control by his party? This, from a President who presided over the highest rate of deficit spending ever in our country? FAIL

and asking the wealthy to pay a little more.

Of course you are! Because nothing says success like taking from the successful to subsidize the unsuccessful! Also, the wealthy have already paid taxes on the money they’ve made. If they are wealthy, they don’t have to keep making more money. What this approach does is penalize those who are on their way to being successful… because we can’t have any of that! FAIL

And ending the war in Afghanistan, so we can do some nation-building here at home.

But I thought we already spent hundreds of billions (or is it trillions?) on stimulus only to see a negligible impact on the economy? The President isn’t really doubling down on stupid again, is he? …or is that tripling? …or quadrupling? Ok, I lost count… FAIL

That’s the right path.

Err… no. Doubling down on a proven-wrong approach does not make you Presidential… it makes you something else…

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result.” — Albert Einstein

If their plan is the same as Obamacamp tries to make the case, who do you want to have at the wheel, someone who was already 4 years and showed utter incompetence and made things worse –or– someone with a trackrecord of success in these economic matters?

exit question: what were we thinking in ’08 with a bad economy and electing someone without experience…

You are on the right trail, but it seems that Romney’s campaign staff came to a different conclusion. Clearly their decision was twofold regarding the final debate. Don’t get cornered as a “warmonger”, and don’t throw any punches that might look anything less than Presidential. Their analysis would have to be that the only folks left who haven’t made up their minds are unlikely to be excited by a knock-down, drag-out, fighting Mitt, and more likely to side with a moderate, even-toned, non-confrontational Mitt.

Does Mitt risk the base he’s already coalesced by dialing it back and appearing more conciliatory than combative? It’s a good question, but most likely those that have decided in his favor aren’t going to suddenly shift back to wanting more Socialism, so they probably have that right; to pull in the remaining undecideds, soften up and be diplomatic, cooperative, Presidential, while letting Obama fume and snarl and scowl, and hopefully turn off those same people.